Discussion in 'Photography Beginners' Forum' started by ILovePlaya, Jan 27, 2009.
Any one have experience with these?
Looking at one for my d40.
I use them alot but they work better on primes and top quality lenses, i wouldn't use a 2x on a zoom but 1.4X are ok, i have a Kenko 2x which is fantastic for the money and a Canon1.4x
Kenko 2X on a 300mmF2.8L
As gary said they only work well on some lenses and even before that they will only attach to certain lenses as well.
Generally any crop sensor only lenses will not fit teleconverters, also its a general rule that low end budget lenses will not fit teleconveters. Note that sometimes a 3rd party option like a sigma teleconverter will fit a lens which is not rated as being teleconverter compatable.
Generally I would say a good 1.4teleconverter is a good choice - offering a good increase to focal length and only losing one stop of light as well as not affecting image quality too much. However they are best kept to prime lenses - in the zoom department the 70-200mm lenses tend to be of high enough quality to take a 1.4 teleconverter - I don't know about the 55-200mm that you have though.
A 2*teleconverter is a much more tricky beast and really is only for prime lenses - on zooms it can work decently for websized images though fullsize things will take a noticable hit in the image quality area - also it reduces 2 stops of light as well.
Look's like I will start saving
for a long lens.
The 50-200 just can't get to those eagles.
when I surf round hte birding forums 400mm is often quoted at the shortest ideal focal length - which means either a 400mm prime, 300mm + 1.4TC or a zoom with 400mm. For pure birding a prime is best and the zoom the worst (since you are not using the rest of the zoom range).
A lot will depend on how much you are willing to save up for
I use a 2x teleconverter on my 50-200 and get the shots I want.
400mm f/7 1/125 ISO 800
I should point out that the camera body does have a noticable effect on image quality with teleconverters - especaily the 2* ones - I have noted that with beginner levels ones there tends to be far lesser performance than with higher end ones and this I have read, is down to the pixels, their density and arrangment on higher end sensors. I don't know about the olympus line since you all use those smaller sensors to start with.
but that shot definatly is showing good quality - better I would say than my attempt with the 70-200mm and a 2*TC -
though I think if one can get the subject to fill the fame more rather than be a small component then the softening is not as noticable
Yeah, I didn't know much when I got my first dSLR...and now I have to much invested in my current system to make the switch. But anyway I'm pretty happy with the results i get.....but to tell the truth, had I known then what I know now...I would be a Canon guy.
Now, I'm having second thoughts.
Distance between you and the eagle?
That's a nice shot.
Acceptable me at least.
Hope to shoot all wildlife.
Not just eagles.
Separate names with a comma.